Australian cities offer free public transport to fill empty seats, ease cost of living pain

The Star

a day ago

SYDNEY: Up till August 2024, Seleneah More, a regular bus user in Brisbane, was spending about A$40 (S$33) a week on public transport.
Her partner spent the same amount on transport, while her 12-year-old son spent about A$20 a week.
The burden of this weekly expense was lifted on Aug 5, 2024, when the Queensland state government offered 50-cent fares for all rides on the state's buses, trains and light rail, regardless of the distance.
More, a 49-year-old town planner, told The Straits Times her family now spends about A$20 a week on commutes. They save about A$47 when making trips to the Gold Coast, south of Brisbane, to visit her parents.
'For families, it helps not having to worry if your kids have enough money to get to and from where they are going,' she said.
The Queensland scheme, which costs about A$300 million a year, was introduced as a six-month trial but was made permanent in February after it led to a big boost in public transport use and helped commuters cope with the cost of living.
Official data in February showed that train travel had increased by 19 per cent, bus use by 16 per cent, light rail by 28 per cent, and ferries by 43 per cent since the scheme began.
Other Australian states and territories have also been moving towards free travel in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and the ensuing work-from-home phenomenon that caused a drop in public transport use.
In Australia's most populous state of New South Wales, public transport usage remains more than 20 per cent below levels in late 2019, though usage has been steadily increasing.
The state of Victoria announced on May 18 that public transport will be free for passengers under the age of 18 from Jan 1, 2026. This will apply to all forms of transport, including Melbourne's famous tram network, as well as trains and buses.
The government said about one million children will benefit from the scheme, which will cost A$318 million over four years.
'This will save so many struggling families thousands of dollars a year,' Victoria Minister for Public Transport Gabrielle Williams said. 'Cheaper school runs, cheaper weekends at the (football) – and one less thing for families to worry about.'
Transport experts have mostly welcomed the free schemes, saying they reduce congestion and pollution and encourage greater leisure travel, which can assist the tourism and hospitality sectors.
A transport planning expert, Professor David Levinson from Sydney University, told ST that free or near-free public transport could lure additional passengers who 'might then stick around as the fares climb back up'.
He said the extra passengers caused little additional expense on networks that were not full as the operating costs are fixed.
Charging a small amount – such as 50 Australian cents in Queensland – was a good way to ensure that public transport attracts only passengers who need to travel, he added.
'Covid lowered ridership and Australian governments have tried to maintain services,' he said. 'To bring ridership up, you can add a sweetener to attract more people.'
Canberra, the national capital, had free travel on its buses and light rail from September to November 2024 and now offers free travel on Fridays.
Western Australia offered free travel in the city of Perth and regional areas during the eight weeks to Feb 5 – at a cost of A$14 million – to encourage public transport use during the slower summer period. A similar scheme during the previous summer led to a 42 per cent increase in public transport use compared with the summer before.
But the moves have faced criticism from some economists, who questioned whether the schemes are affordable for cash-strapped Australian states and territories, which already heavily subsidise public transport.
Some public transport advocates say money spent on free schemes should instead be invested in extending transport networks and increasing the frequency of services.
However, experts have said the schemes have been successful and should be continued, as long as they do not prevent governments from investing in other transport improvements.
A public transport expert, Dr Abraham Leung from Griffith University in Brisbane, told ST that assessing the cost of the Queensland scheme should consider broader benefits, such as lower pollution, reducing the need for road infrastructure and the associated costs, and the health benefits from increased walking.
But he said the authorities should also focus on other improvements, particularly increasing the frequency of services. In Australia, a vast country with a population that is largely spread across sprawling cities, governments tend to focus on providing wide coverage of transport services rather than improving frequency and capacity along main routes.
'Transport in Australia is seen as a social safety net to ensure there is good geographic coverage,' he said. 'If resources are limited, we should focus on trunk routes and make sure they are more frequent, and that services are not overloaded and there are enough seats.'
Prof Levinson said Sydney, the most populous city, had a good coverage of buses that ensured people had decent methods of accessing major train and transport hubs, but cities with smaller populations had fewer first- and last-mile options.
He added: 'In Sydney, we lean towards providing coverage rather than frequency, particularly in outer suburbs.'
In Brisbane, which is set to host the Summer Olympics in 2032, Ms More said she believed the near-free rides and the focus on switching commuters to public transport are crucial to improving the city's liveability.
'Brisbane wants to be a world city but we have to prioritise transport,' she said. 'The only way to be a proper city is to have good public transport.' - The Straits Times/ANN